Thomas Frank Books

What If? was one of Marvel's better ideas from the 70's. The best thing about this concept was that these were NOT "imaginary stories", instead, these stories REALLY occured, just in some alternative universe.

That being said, the early What If stories are somewhat problematic. Too much time is taken reviewing the events that occured in our reality, taking many valuable pages away from what we really want to know - what happens in the alternate universe.

Also, I agree with the reviewer below in that some of the initial entries of the What If? series were weak. The series does get better, and some of the later stories are fascinating, and it's almost a shame that you'll only get to visit these realities for one issue.

That being said, this book is a fun read, especially if you like alternate timeline stories and wonder "What If.....?"

This trade paperback includes the following stories:
What if Spider-Man Joined the Fantastic Four?

What if the Hulk Had Always Had Bruce Banner's Brain?

What if the Avengers Had Never Been?

What if the Invaders Had Stayed Together After World War Two?

What if Captain America and Bucky Had Both Survived World War II?

What if the Fantastic Four Had Different Super-Powers?

I agree this should have been an Essentials offering. But it's a fun read never the less and it paved the way for stronger stories in later issues. As far as expectations maybe we are too jaded in this new century to appreciate what Roy Thomas and other's were doing. These stories shake the foundations of Marvel legend and take them to another place. I agree that they don't all work but the ones that do are great to visit again.

WHAT IF? is one of my favorite series from Marvel, the reason being that I loved the concept. It was a great idea from Roy Thomas in which Uatu, the Watcher, would present the events of the Marvel Universe in alternate realities. Even better, these events usually cast a harder or darker aspect on the characters, which, while pretty far-out, always made me happy that we ended up with the Marvel Universe that we did.

While I consider many WHAT IF? stories to be classics, the early issues weren't all that well-written, and the artwork was sub-standard, for the most part. Aside from an Avengers issue illustrated by Gil Kane, and a story of Captain America never being frozen in the Arctic, there's not much interesting material here. Many of the ideas Thomas had for these early issues were so whacked-out and pointless, they didn't make for very interesting reading. As such, I feel that the best way for Marvel to reprint this series is the Essentials format: 500 pages in black and white. That way, you'd get quite a few stories that show the evolution of the series, and for a reasonable price. Unfortunately, Marvel instead chose to release a color reprint of only the first 6 issues (~ 215 pages) for the wallet-busting price of $24.95! I also must warn that the recoloring of these issues is absolutely horrible, with characters' costumes changing color schemes from panel to panel, and no attention to detail. So, with a bad reprint of poor-to-average quality stories, newcomers will likely have a hard time understanding why WHAT IF? was so much fun... assuming that the ridiculous price didn't already turn them away.

My advice is to skip this book. If you must have it, then order it only from Amazon at a discount, as full-price is waaaay too much to pay.

This book reads too much like a college textbook. If you are doing a research paper for a psychology class, then this book is for you. I found this book's approach oftentimes so overly analytical that it felt impersonal. Also, many of the case studies were difficult to relate to. As a woman, I believe I need to find a book that is written by a FEMALE who knows full well the complexities of a woman's mind and can understand on a certain level. I'm looking for a book that offers me encouragement in a compassionate and meaningful way. This book just didn't do it for me, so I sent it back.

This book helped me understand a lot of the reasons for my intense social anxiety. Of course, working through the anxiety with a professional Christian counselor was the biggest help for me personally, but this book was a great addition to the therapeutic process. The book offers great spiritual insight into the agony of anxiety.

This book which falls into the self-help category is a well written book that is easy to read for most. While the required writing will be helpful to all, those who are well read in this area of anxiety and worry can benefit just from reading. The most helpful things are the case studies in which one can often see one's own life mirrored. Although the authors are Christians the material is not overtly spiritual or preachy and can be read by people of all faiths or no faith at all. I give it four stars for the authors ability to say plainly, without a lot of psychological jargon, what can truly be of help to others. I am purchasing this extra copy as a gift for a friend.

This book was awkwardly organized and makes what had to be an interesting life sound sort of academic. The writer has no gift for anecdote and no flair. There are lots of absorbing show business biographies out there and this isn't one of them.

This book is just the biography Frank Loesser deserves. It analyzes his wonderful music very thoroughly, as well as his lyrics, which were always conversational and always expertly crafted.
However, he book does not get all that in depth regarding Mr. Loesser's personal life, which was certainly colorful being that he worked with talents such as Cy Feuer, Bob Fosse and most importantly, Abe Burrows as well as mentoring up and coming songwriters such as Jerry Herman, Richard Adler, Meredith Wilson and Stephen Sondheim. However, not conetrating on that very much doesn't make the book bad. The analyisis of his work makes up for it in spades. I can hardly wait for the other titles in this Yale Broadway Masters series to be released as Kander and Ebb, Kurt Weill and the other songwriters who will be written about in future volumes deserve equally exceptional biographies.

A great book to read for anyone, but especially teachers and others who care for children. We all can remember being bullied and perhaps bullying someone when we were young and this book helps us to use our compassion and empathy to attempt to change the tide. To say there is a better and higher standard of treating other people--no matter what. Also reminds us the reason why. A great book that I am so glad I read and have given copies away many times.

Mr. Peretti's book often had me close to tears, and I understand why he wrote it. There are some gems in this book that I loved. For example, on page 81 he claims, "The message a bully sends is a mockery of God's handiwork, a lie that slanders God's nature and negates His love for us."; this is a quote I will memorize. Another gem starts on page 113 and gives us some clever retorts for those who claim that there is no God and hence, no Moral Law Giver.

Unfortunately, he describes the problems well, but he is very weak on answers. He urges: "Those being abused speak up and seek help", "The strong kids stand up and protect the weak", "Those in authority to take notice - and action", "Everyone to stop thinking of abuse as `kids being kids'".

As a former victim and bully, as one who has tried to stand up and protect the weak, as one in authority taking notice and attempting action, and as one not thinking of abuse as "kids being kids"; I found nothing I could use in his book. Bullying is ancient. Just look at Satan picking on Job or Saul picking on David and you realize that we have been working on this problem for thousands of years. We've also been trying the same actions Mr. Peretti advocates for thousands of years, and we still have the same problems.

I am a middle school teacher, and I have tremendous problems with bullies in my classes. I personally tried Mr. Peretti's methods, and I failed to make them work. It's time to try something new, and there is a method I have used that works for me. Try reading Izzy Kalman's 'Bullies to Buddies: How to Turn Your Enemies Into Friends' for new and refreshing ideas that work.

This is a first impression:

The words, based on a retelling of the Psalms by the "Ecclesia Bible Society" (who need to get themselves a website, IMHO) are fresh, expressive, lyrical. I wish I could be as enthusiastic about the music, which never seems to find a tone appropriate to the words being set.

Much of the music is languid and melancholy, a kind of grainy lethargy ubiquitous to the indie-rock ethos. This style works well for the title track: "Please don't make us sing this song / It used to be happy / When we were free and home" (from Psalm 137). But when "Let the name of God be high" is sung with a melancholy drone of background vocals, and "Gather round with those who love and sing / He is our king" (Track 4) is set as a melancholy ballad, it makes me wonder if the artists are too stuck on being indie-rock cool.

When the album does go for a change of pace, it's poorly executed. One particularly egregious example is "As if that were not enough," which sets the text awkwardly and mechanically to such banal music I'd expect it to underscore a circus clown act (there's a whistle solo). This to the words: "He reached down and drew me / From the deep dark hole where I was stranded." If I didn't know better, I'd think this was a parody.

It's not a complete disaster, though. If you like the indie-acoustic-rock-band style, this is a decent collection of songs with some very artful lyrics. That they take musical risks is more commendable than putting that saccharine Nashville CCM production stamp on everything.

I normally hate things like this. Basically this is a compilation CD where music artists give their interpretations of several of the psalms. While I agree in principle this is how the pslams should be done, normally it results in fluffy pop garbage. I expected to hate this CD. I didn't. It's beautiful. These folksy arrangements hit home in unexpected ways and, I think, really capture the spirit of these pslams. Artists like Derek Webb, Don Chaffer, Sandra McCraken, Sara Groves and others lend their talenst and gifts to this beautiful interpretation.

Examples are too hard to follow which makes this book difficult to read. I spent the whole semester crashing my head on the wall because of this book.

Better get Calculus by James Stewart

I just completed the Calc series using Thomas Calculus. In Calc I, the instructor commented that we would use this text and that it wasn't the best or the worst (a VERY safe claim to make). I would agee with that.

I found the instructional text adequate but we experienced several cases where the solution to end-of-section problems was not the technique being covered in the section.

I used the softbound vol 1 & 2. You can save some money if you are taking a semester or two of calculus, but if you intend to cover Calc III & IV, I recommend buying the hard bound.

My boyfriend took two semesters of Calc with this book and was able to essentially self teach himself all of it. The examples are well explained and the problems reflect the section material very well.

Great for students in engineering or science--but not for mathematics majors who will go on to take analysis and algebra. They deserve a treatment by Spivak or Apostol. There are some interesting problems that follow the end of each chapter. Overall, it's not that interesting, but not that bad in terms of material presentation.

I took calculus back in college in the early 1970s and I was very pleased to see how much color graphics have done to make this subject understandable. I was using this book to tutor my daughter and I found it much easier than I thought it would be to teach her about the Taylor Series (for example) because of the clever use of color on the graph (showing how fit improved as more terms were added to the series). The book was very readable and seemed to be rigorous (I'm not a mathematician, but I couldn't see that anything was missing).

Be careful if you want a book on second order differential equations. There are two problems: One small problem is that this book sometimes has a chapter on second order differential equations and sometimes it doesn't. I'm not talking about two editions either...the 11th edition may or may not have that material (I think it is chapter 17). I suppose they had two printings so beware of the used copies if you want that material. Also, the table on second order differential equations has an error in it (I think it said k when it should have said ki...).

On the positive side, this book contains a lot of interesting information about Jung especially from a personal point of view. Contemporary accounts are presented and where there are conflicting stories the author at least mentioned all the possibilities. Almost the entire first half of the book deals with Jung's interaction with Freud. It is clear that the author prefers Freud. This is also the section of the book were the author allows himself to subjectively dismiss Jungian ideas. The rest of the book is more neutral in analysis though the picture painted is not an attractive one. But Jung may not have been the most likable person. To me the greatest flaw of the work was that I still did not have an appreciation of what made Jung as popular as he was and still is? The book is readable with some interesting information and views but it cannot be the only biography of Jung you read.

This book is an in-depth biography of Carl Gustav Jung, encompassing his private life as well as his scholarly work. It begins with the Jung's ancestors on both his father's and mother's sides, and continues through Jung's death in 1961. McLynn describes Jung's elementary school years, high school, university, and post-graduate training at the Burghoeltzli Mental Hospital. His relationships are treated in great detail, including those with his wife and mistresses, as well as with Freud and other colleagues. Each of his scholarly works is also treated to summary and analysis as it falls into the chronological record of Jung's life. Jung and his contacts left much material behind from which to draw details and anecdotes for this biography, everything from Jung's personal dreams to reactions of notables such as Freud to comments made at dinner parties.

I had very little knowledge of Jung (or Freud) before reading this book, but I feel the book has given me a basic familiarity with the man, and with some of his work. McLynn does a decent job of explaining the complex ideas presented in Jung's scholarly works in a manner that is mostly accessible to those with no training in the field. Nevertheless, he does use some terminology (Jung's?) such as "number one" and "number two" when referring to parts of a single person's personality which remain completely unclear to me.

This is certainly the least sympathetic biography of any person I have ever read. From McLynn's descriptions, Jung was a self-centered bully and polygamist, to just begin a list of his character flaws. From McLynn's account, I thought these aspects of his character were well-known, but when I tried discussing them with psychologist friends, they were disturbed by my repeating such terms, found frequently in the book. Is it because McLynn overplays negative aspects of Jung's personality, or because there are certain generations of American psychologists who continue to deny that Jung was not an unpleasant man? With nothing else to go on besides this book, I have no way to judge the veracity of the claims myself. But to the uninformed reader, the book seems extremely well-researched, and will give an in-depth introduction into the life of one of the most important academic figures of the Twentieth Century.

Exhibits little, if any, understanding of the immensity of Jung's work. Try Wehr's biography instead.

Wanting an introductory overview to C. G. Jung and his work, and reading the editorial reviews that Mr. McLynn has presented an objective and clear account of them, I eagerly picked up this biography, but was disappointed to find it a tendentious polemic relentlessly and repetitively attacking Jung (and, by the way, I am not a "Jungian"), dwelling at unnecessary length on the Freud-Jung relationship and insufficiently on Jung's influence as an original thinker of the XXc, and most signally, failing to present any sort of precis of Jung's seminal ideas that would be helpful to the general reader. Don't bother with this one: wait for a better biography, something on the lines of Peter Gay's Freud: a Life for Our Time.

McLynn doesn't like Jung ideas. Not a problem, really, but then why write a book about him? So the book crawls slowly, unhappily amassing all negative gossip about Jung, leaving the reader ( as probably also it did to the writer), miserable, exhausted, untill, at last the book ends, and a sigh of relief is impossible to avoid. Was this really necessary? Was this a paid, imposed job? This is really a pathography, a subgenre of our sick postmodern times, and I hope that these kind of people never go so far as the write a new life of Christ.

While I agree that this is not a text that delves deep into the theories of Lacan or Derrida or Fish or any of the others, it is not intended to do so. I have found it to be an excellent tool for introducing my high school Advanced Placement students to the world of literary criticism. Certainly some of the articles can get wordy or bogged down in "technical" detail, but literary criticism has never been for the reader who wants to skim and get the assignment "over with." Any critical theory takes time and patience to work through; critical theory questions ideas and requires a commitment on the part of the reader to think, question, and engage with the text. There are some essays that younger students simply do not have the skills for yet but there are others that are quite accessible to them. In particular, my students found the essays on Representation, Structure, Race, and Canon very interesting.

This source has one significant advantage over many other texts. For each article, there is an immediate application of the technique to a well-known piece of literature. I know that my students reading of Appiah's essay on race dramatically impacted how they interpreted Shakespeare's play Othello and then later Schuyler's novel Black No More. While neither my students nor I always agree with what the critics are saying, I have found the book a great starting point for discussion.

This book offers a very interesting, concise look into many of the terms employed by contemporary literary/critical theory. I would suggest anyone read this book if they want a short introduction to some of the thoughts employed by contemporary critics when analyzing a piece of literature. It is not, however, sufficient as an introduction to that theory. I would suggest supplementing this text with several primary sources--people who want to speak intelligently about Foucault or Derrida or Lacan or Saussure should read their primary readings. If one decides not to, one comes out with the impression that these literary critics could give the last, or at least the most authoritative, word on their topic. This is, of course, not necessarily so. Use this book, it is an exemplary secondary source on literary theory, but supplement it with primary readings to get a more nuanced impression of contemporary thoughts about literature.

Many times I found myself arguing against the assertions made about literature and theory in this book. I think, perhaps, that sometimes particular "American" critics fail to capture the fullness of the arguments by French theorists. This is not to say that "American" theorists "do not get it"; however, it should make you weary about simply accepting the presentation of the topics in this book. The ideas presented by literary theory are inordinately complex, and sometimes it takes actually grappling with the confusing language of the French, or of the translated French (though this introduces yet another problem) to actually understand what critics actually say about literature.

By all means, buy this book for a concise rendering of the issues. However, do not think for a moment that this book accurately portrays contemporary literary study in its fullness. There is so much more than this book initially communicates.

I am impressed by this text, with one caveat. At my school it is used as a graduate level textbook and that is probably the appropriate level.

I am an undergrad and I enjoy this book immensely. I'm constantly finding explanations (finally!) for most of the indecipherable ideas embedded in the critical articles I have to use for literature papers. It's giving me the language to interrogate texts and making my reading experiences much more meaningful. This book gives me food for thought for days.

But if it's brain food, it's definitely health food, maybe even crunchy and vegan. There is some truth in the other reviewers' impression that the essays can come out on the pretentious side. This stuff is hard on the modern entertainment-loving brain, unless your brain is entertained by a challenge. I love this book, but I pace myself to about a chapter a month. Since there are 28 chapters, it's going to take me about 2 years to get through it!

The book it is an excellent compendium of complex ideas. The ideas are never cheated of their complexity and their originators are never given short shrift. It can be gotten through in a semester, but only by using selections. Don't be afraid of this book. It's even reasonably priced. But if you try to foist it on undergrads, you might be buying a rebellion.

A better text for a fast and dirty overview could be Peter Barry's "Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory." ISBN: 0719062683. I was taught this book at another school and it's great if you're looking for conversational, succinct, 12-page chapters on all the major schools, in chronological order. But you won't get a deep understanding from Barry's book, and it will only frustrate those who actually want an understanding they can take away long after they put the book down.

this book is the devil! i am using it in a lit studies course and loathe every second i waste reading these essays. they seem to be written mostly by stuffy university professors who are attempting to sound like they know what they are talking about. It is not a dictionary, nor does it help the reader properly understand a term. If you are curious about a word that is discussed in the book, i suggest looking it up in the dictionary. it's easier. and you'll actually learn what the word means without having to search through thick sentences that really make no sense and large words that you know the author just pulled out of a thesauraus.

This book is an anthology of essays describing some important aspects of literature and criticism. It's a really good idea, but badly done here. The book identifies itself as 'a landmark introduction to the work of literary theory' and claims to be suitable for 'the reader beginning to learn about critical theory.' A more accurate description might be, 'written by stuffy, self-important old people for same to enjoy.'

The editors seem to have taken great pains to select works written by people who feel a need to choose the longest word they can find to represent an idea; if a suitably long word does not exist, they combine a word with prefixes and suffixes until they are satisfied. There is no reason to write like this, especially if you're trying to teach someone something. The chapters of the book can be translated into speaking man's English to good effect, and every one of the 28 critical terms really is simple enough to explain without the comically frequent fallback on Latin phrases and words.

I don't know why so many people think this is a great book. Maybe because it's filled with words like 'prosopopoeia,' which is, I'll admit, a valid English word, but a little bit limited in its general use among readers beginning to learn about critical theory. The flow of the essays becomes stinted by the necessity of referring to a dictionary at every fourth word and then translating the resulting mess into a sentence that normal people understand.

In short, this is a bad textbook. The authors have hidden very simple concepts behind such a thick wall of confusing use of language and terminology that the reader becomes a gold miner, chipping away at the useless mountain of words before him to extract what little vein of content he can find.

Doctor Strange had an up and down career as a comic-book. Its high points, in my opinions, were the classic and never-equalled run by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko reprinted in the first Essential Doctor Strange; the Lovecraft-inspired run mostly drawn by Barry Windsor-Smith and Frank Brunner (reprinted in Essential Doctor Strange vol. 2) and possibly the Marshall Rogers-illustrated run that will (hopefully) be reprinted in a later volume. Luckily, there are plenty of good moments in between these high marks, thanks in large part to gene Colan's frequent contribution.

A good thing about Gene's art on this title is that he did not try to imitate Ditko's style nor to copy his version of alternate worlds. Bringing his own vision allowed Colan to really shine in a few stories collected in this book (particularly in a story involving the character Eternity and the possible destruction of our world).

Storywise, Steve Englehart does a fair job here. Many stories focus more on the nature of reality than on confrontation, which is fine in a book about magic. There is a very 1970s feel to many stories, with themes that were also approached by other Marvel writers of the era (Steve Gerber and Don MacGregor, to name but two).

Altogether, it is true that this book lacks the grandeur of Essentials #1 and #2. It is still a pretty entertaining collection with a few gems thrown in. At the price, it is a bargain.

I honestly don't get the appeal of these books. Why bother making (or reading) black & white reprints of classic four-color comics...? I mean, yeah, the stories are still great and the original comics are hard to find, but a huge part of what made these comics great was the eye-popping artwork, including the bright primary colors: reading them in dull B&W is just plain wrong. Sure, the printing costs are lower, so you can get more pages for your money, but it's more pages of boring, not more pages of fun. It's really a travesty.

This is particularly true of the old Doctor Strange stories, which had such fabulous artwork: you *think* you're reading the stories in this format, but you're really not. Not by a longshot.

On the other hand, it recently occurred to me that these could be used as coloring books... Maybe you could buy a box of crayons to go along with all the artwork that the publishers ruined in this format. (Axton)

Doctor Strange has always been one of the most beautifully rendered comics offered to the mass market.
Although the stories and characters are still there, it looses quite a bit when not printed in full color.
In the same way Jaws without the music is just a fish tale, Doctor Strange without color is just a comic.

First of all, let's set the terms of this review. I was aware that this was b/w prior to ordering it and I was okay with that. Also, I had never read even a single issue of Doctor Strange, so I really have no frame of reference with regard to the comic's legacy. At age 30 it has probably been nearly 2 decades since I've read comics at all (although I was a passionate Marvel fan back in the day). Because I spend the bulk of my time reading more complex scientific and literary material, I occasionally like to unwind with a lightweight guilty pleasure in between books. That's precisely the function this book was to serve. I went in with low expectations, and admit that I was pleasantly surprised. Yes, the stories and plot devices do strain the credulity at times but hey: it's a comic. (Note: I found the stories in this volume to be less tedious than all the forced human drama in Essential X-Men Vol. 6, a volume I purchased around the same time.) Overall, I really enjoy all the great artwork (I don't mind the b/w a bit), and like the serialized narrative format that encompasses multiple issues. Taken for what it is, I think it was a great purchase. I can flip through a couple issues every now and then, and come back to it later. With ~30 issues, it's already kept me occupied for quite some time. The stories can occasionally get a little redundant, but it hasn't bothered me too much. If you're looking for high brow literature, this isn't for you. But if you want a good rainy day read, or something to keep you occupied for a long train ride, you could do a lot worse.

For the price of this book (which I see has now gone up even more!) there's too little of substance here. This is a very thin book with too much space taken up telling us how smart cards are used in industry, business, etc. all of which has nothing to do with getting smart cards going in *your* application. If you needed convincing that smart cards are useful for business applications you wouldn't be looking for this book, would you?

If you are an absolute beginner with smart cards you may get some useful tidbits of information here, but I don't think there's anything here you couldn't find through a couple hours of research via Google or from any smart card manufacturer's documentation. If this was a low cost beginning tutorial it might be of some value at one-fourth or one-fifth of its current price.

I bought this book looking for a deeper reference regarding Javacard applets, native code in smartcards and so on. Neverthless I found the book very useful in the off-card stuff, because it explains in a very clear way how to access the terminal, send APDU's, etc., always using the Open Card Framework which is very important for us Java developers. I strongly recommend this if you are developing applications in Java that must access smartcards, but if you're developing also the on-card software, let's say the Javacard applets, then you must also get the book from Zhiqun Chen also available in amazon.

The important thing that I notice is that the book is too heavily based on the Open Card framework. I needed instead a book on java card first. Only found some tutorials on the net until now.

As a person who is concerning in developing javacards via OCF, found this one very useful due to contents that it has on framework. You could get and develop off-card apps, if it does make sense to you..